It is generally not illegal for a business to make an arrangement with one customer that excludes others. “People don’t use Google because they have to – they use it because they want to,” Kent Walker, Google’s president of global affairs, said in a blog post. Google also claims mobile users can switch easily if they want to use another search engine. Rather, the makers of phones and web browsers set Google search as their default because they wanted to deliver the “highest quality” experience for their customers, Google claimed in its January filing. The agreements did not prevent rivals from developing their own search engines or stop companies such as Apple and Mozilla from promoting them, Google argues. It said in a January court filing that its browser agreements were “legitimate competition” and not “illicit exclusion”. Google maintains it did not violate antitrust law. The government said the browser agreements – steering billions of web queries to Google every day – have resulted in less choice for consumers and less innovation. Google has grabbed a 90 percent market share in search in the US in recent years, according to government estimates. The government’s lawsuit, filed in 2020 in federal court, alleges these deals were intended by Google to be “exclusionary”, denying rivals access to search queries and clicks, and allowing Google to entrench its market dominance. The Justice Department and 52 attorneys general representing US states or territories say Google unfairly forged its domination of online search by paying billions of dollars to Apple and other business partners to ensure its search engine would be the default on most phones and browsers. Keep reading list of 3 items list 1 of 3 Google touts AI for news, insists journalists can’t be replaced list 2 of 3 Google turns 25: A look at the world’s top performing searches list 3 of 3 Australia to require Google, Bing to clamp down on AI-created child porn end of list What is the trial about?
0 kommentar(er)
